Final answer:
Nene should critique her former professor's book by using critical analysis that includes personal experiences, multiple perspectives, and a comparison of information sources. She should consider different viewpoints and evaluate the book's use of pathos and evidence while maintaining balance in recognizing its strengths and limits.
Step-by-step explanation:
To critique her former professor's book about the lives affected by the pandemic, Nene should use an approach that is grounded in critical analysis, similar to the perspective used by Trevor Garcia in analyzing the U.S. response to the pandemic in his report. Nene should begin by honestly reflecting on her own experiences during the pandemic and then consider multiple viewpoints. Like Trevor, she may look beyond her personal experiences to include a wide array of sources in her critique, such as scholarly articles, governmental reports, and personal anecdotes, to forge a comprehensive understanding.
Additionally, Nene should address the strength and accuracy of the evidence presented by comparing the quality of online sources of information about vaccines, as pointed out in the chapter. She may critique the book's use of pathos and evaluate whether the professor has successfully managed to engage readers while also conveying solid, well-researched information.
In conducting her critical analysis, Nene ought to consider different perspectives affected by the topic, as advised in the chapter, including educators, parents, and college admissions departments. The critique should be balanced, recognizing the book's strengths and limits in addressing the complexities of the pandemic's impact on society.